Magdalena Wrembel Teacher Training College, UAM, Poznań

1. Phonological "know that" or "know how"? - in pursuit of determinants of second language pronunciation attainments Magdalena Wrembel Teacher Training College, UAM, Poznań

2. Introduction • The paper reports on the results of a specially designed training programme; • aims at investigating the effectiveness of explicit instruction and the role of theoretical training; • expects to demonstrate patterns of change in pronunciation performance on pre-test / post-test measures; • seeks to verify the hypothesis that conscious knowledge leads to the formation of mental representations; • attempts to account for other variables related to L2 pronunciation acquisition.

3. Outline of the presentation • Background studies • Theoretical framework • Rationale and goals • Experimental design • Results of the study • Conclusions  implications for pronunciation pedagogy

4. Studies on predictors of success • Purcell & Suter 1980 - futility of instruction • Dickerson 1983 - effectiveness of phonological rules • Champagne et al. 1988 - perceptual training • Dziubalska-Kołaczyk 1990 -formal > natural setting • Elliott 1995 - formal instruction • Gayoso et al. 1999 - meta & phonological training • Stasiak & Szpyra-Kozłowska 2003 - aural exposure & drilling vs. phonetic instruction • Waniek-Klimczak 2004 - phonetic universals • Baran 2004 - field independence

5. "Know how" or "know that" ? • RATIONALE: need for investigations into the effectiveness of pronunciation instruction • ASSUMPTION: pronunciation improves through gradual monitoring of an acquired system based on metacompetence • METACOMPETENCE: conscious knowledge of the grammar of a language (e.g. phon. & phon. - metaphonological competence) • FRAMEWORK: NATURAL PHONOLOGY • (D. Stampe & P. Donegan,W. U. Dressler)

6. Model of acquisition of L2 phonology acc. to Nat. Phon. • L2 learner - reduced phonological system • only selected processes available • confronted with L2 subconsciously applies L1 processes • IF processes L1 = L2  positive transfer • IF L1  L2  L1 interference • (lacking L2 processes have to be learnt consciously as rules)  explicit instruction, metacompetence ! • Successful access to phonological processes conditioned by sociological, psychological & linguistic factors

7. Goals of the study • To find correlation between L2 pronunciation attainment & theoretical training • "know that" > "know how" • To investigate other potential determinants of pronunciation success

8. Experimental design • Participants: 33 first year students • Timing: Oct 2002 - Feb 2003 • Course: 50 hours, 15 weeks • Groups: • control  practical training • experimental  practical + theoretical instruction • Hypothesis: Metacompetence as a determinant of L2 pronunciation success

9. Participants - control factors analysis • Age: 19 - 25 (M: 20;6) • Length of formal exposure: 5 - 13 (M: 9) • First contact with English: 5 - 16 (M: 10;6) • Stay in UK / US - 35% • Lack of previous phonetic training • Formal setting of instruction • Comparable language proficiency • Positive attitude and high motivation (PAI)

10. Instruments and test administration • Perception tests: • Oxford Placement Listening Test (Allan 1992) • Vowel Recognition Test (VRT) • Production tests: • LIST - reading a list of 50 words or phrases • DIAL - reading a dialogue in pairs • SPEECH - extemporaneously produced narrative

11. Instruments and test administration (2) • Task-related variability • Digitally recorded speech samples • CoolEdit96 (22kHz, 16-bit resolution) • 3 judge listeners • interrater reliability (.93 - .67)

12. Treatment - course content & procedures • Practical training - exposure & imitation: • auditory sensitisation and discrimination • articulatory warm-up • phonetic drills • dialogue reading and performing • speeches and presentations • teacher correction (audio, visual & kinaesthetic feedback)

13. Treatment - course content & procedures (2) • Theoretical training: • articulatory descriptions • C & V systems classification • contrastive analysis • theoretical readings and discussions • visual aids reinforcement • meta-awareness raising

14. Cycles of practice modes (cf. Morley 1991) • Imitative (dependent) speech practice • pronunciation drills with a model • Rehearsed (guided) speech practice • oral script reading & pre-prepared presentations • Independent practice • spontaneous presentations, self-generated content

15. PRONUNCIATION PERFORMANCE - experimental group • TOTAL improvement by 18 % • LIST by 42 % • DIAL by 20 % • SPEECH by 8 % • PERC by 3 %

16. PRONUNCIATION PERFORMANCE- control group • TOTAL improvement by 13 % • LIST by 26 % • DIAL by 16 % • SPEECH by 6 % • PERC by 4.4 %

17. PRETEST / POSTTEST CHANGE - EXPERIMENTAL VS. CONTROL

18. Correlational analysis of variables

19. Implications for further research • To replicate the experiment on: • a larger sample • a more heterogeneous sample • To measure the effectiveness of innovative techniques • To enhance instruments for measuring perception

20. Conclusions • Explicit pronunciation training: • improvement in overall phonetic accuracy • phonological metacompetence - determinant of success • Conscious knowledge of phonological processes facilitates: • formation of mental representations • self-organisation of the new phonological system • Implications for foreign language learning: • metalinguistic awareness raising • supplementing practical phonetic training with theoretical instruction in phonetics and phonology